Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you want psionics in your D&D?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 7148395" data-attributes="member: 5100"><p>There are a couple of questions, here. (i.e. my opinions are legion)</p><p></p><p>1) Do I want the Mystic in 5E?</p><p></p><p>Well, I'm not sure <u>want</u> in really the right word. I wasn't missing it before it existed. But... It's kind of cool. I like toys. This doesn't seem unbalanced. It's different enough that it doesn't really seem to trample on anything existing. It seems to make the Monk a bit less "what the heck is that doing here?" So, sure. Throw it in. I'd rather have the Mystic than the Barbarian.</p><p></p><p>2) Does the Mystic represent a continuation of the idea of Psionics from previous editions?</p><p></p><p>Eh... Not really. Sure, there are some nods, here and there, but it really doesn't match up particularly well. Psionics in earlier editions were strange and unusual. The Mystic is just pseudo-eastern mysticism. Again, cool, but not really bearing the torch.</p><p></p><p>3) Do I want Psionic-Magic Transparency (a.k.a. are psionics different)?</p><p></p><p>If a Wizard can <em>dispel</em> an effect created by divine power then I see no reason why he should not be able to do the same with an effect created by psionics. So, while I don't mind a different subsystem for using psionics (points, skill rolls, whatever), I think psionic-magic transparency is mandatory.</p><p></p><p>4) What would it take to represent Psionics in 5E? What are the actual characteristics of Psionics?</p><p></p><p>This is really one of the two big questions, isn't it (the other being about the Mystic)? It can be broken down into sub-questions:</p><p></p><p>a) Where do psionics come from?</p><p></p><p>We've got a pretty good idea of what arcane magic is. It's manipulating cosmic forces through codified incantations and gestures. Wizards do this by learning the details of these and there's probably a nit to pick with Charisma-based arcanists. Divine magic, on the other hand, comes from some outside force (usually a deity, but could be a force, philosophy, or just tapping into faith). Pretty much all divine casters use Wisdom to represent how well they understand the will/nature of their benefactor. It really doesn't matter whether the divine agent is manipulating the same forces as an arcanist or producing raw power -- they're doing it as an aspect of their nature and it's innate to them.</p><p></p><p>So.... Psionics.... To be meaningfully different, regardless of system, it can't be just arcane manipulation of cosmic forces. Nor can it be channeling the power of some other entity. It <u>could</u> be a <u>different</u> cosmic force, which could make sense, but raises the question about psionic-magic transparency, again. Or, it could be some sort of power that comes from the psion, themselves. This works pretty well with the whole "exposure to the Far Realm awakens you". It also works with "magical mutations" from Dark Sun or the way I've seen it used in many home brews.</p><p></p><p>b) What "modules" should be used to add Psionics?</p><p></p><p>There are two major ways psionics have been played offered over the editions: wild talents and classes. I think both need to be present, to really be psionics of the D&D tradition. I wouldn't carry over the "roll d% to see if you get psionics" from 1E any more than I still roll for stats. With the introduction of feats, I think the wild talent problem is solved and balanced, though. Use something that looks like the Magic Initiate feat (or even just actually use that feat, depending on class implementation).</p><p></p><p>So, feats + classes. Maybe even sub-classes, depending on specific ideas. I think I prefer an Eldritch Knight sort of sub-class to Fighter over the stand-alone Psionic Warrior from 3.5E. YMMV. Also, that's a detail, at this point.</p><p></p><p>c) What's been consistent about Psionics, over the years?</p><p></p><p>I'm going to discount 4E, which totally scrambled basic game structures. In all other editions, psionics has had some sort of power point structure (I think, can't remember 2E, for sure) and has avoided the VSM components of other "caster" classes. Also, there wasn't any spell preparation; you just knew your powers. Plus, there was a subsystem for psychic combat. The details of some of those varied, but they were there.</p><p></p><p>d) Is there anything in 5E that's similar?</p><p></p><p>Well.... Actually, the Sorcerer is pretty close, if you look at the flavor text: The Sorcerer gets power from themselves, not from some outside entity and not from codified practice. The fact that the mechanics of the class still require them to use the VSM is something of an odd design artifact. Really, a Wild Sorcerer is someone who has so much power coursing through them that they can't hardly contain it. When they really work at it, they can focus that raw magic into something meaningful -- like a ball of fire. The fact that this looks like the <em>fireball</em> used by Wizards is either incidental or is because some historic Wizard did a lot of work to duplicate what some Sorcerer did. From a rules perspective, there's no good reason not to just say, "use the rules for <em>fireball</em>". From a flavor perspective, there really shouldn't be any mechanics forcing the Sorcerer to use VSM.</p><p></p><p>If you hand-wave the VSM and use the spell points rules from the DMG, you end up with a Sorcerer who could pass for a Psion at least 80%. No, they don't get their own "spell" list. There's also no psychic combat. But, it's pretty close, otherwise. </p><p></p><p>I don't think the separate spell list is a real issue. There's been a pretty consistent march towards having a standardized list since 1E became 2E. Plus, a lot of the "neo-Vancian" aspects of 5E magic is really just the normal casters looting some of the 3E Psion's goodies. Psychic combat is of dubious value (and always has been), but could be added in a variety of ways.</p><p></p><p>5) Do I want to see Psionics implemented in 5E?</p><p></p><p>Yeah, I do. I've always used them and like them. I may not use them the same way as some, but I think that's part of the beauty of them -- they're a poorly defined subsystem that works well for "I have something different".</p><p></p><p>6) Do I want (a) dedicated Psionics class(es) added to 5E?</p><p></p><p>Eh, not really. I think I'd rather just see Sorcerer fixed. Even if you don't want it to be the new Psion, it's still hard to swallow that they need the VSM restriction. Even without Psionics, I'd like to see the Sorcerer actually perform like someone who is a living mana battery.</p><p></p><p>Once you get to that point, there's really not much mechanical difference between a 5E Sorcerer with a Mentalist subclass with thematic toys and a 3.5 Psion -- unless you really liked the ectoplasmic trappings. If you like power points, just use the DMG spell points on the (VSM-less) Sorcerer. Personally, I don't care about power points vs. slots.</p><p></p><p>As far as psychic combat, either make it a feature of the Mentalist/Psion sub-class or do it through some new spells. The latter option seems to be where the Mystic has gone. Personally, I'm just fine ceding psychic combat to the Mystic and letting the Sorcerer take the mantle of "wild talent".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 7148395, member: 5100"] There are a couple of questions, here. (i.e. my opinions are legion) 1) Do I want the Mystic in 5E? Well, I'm not sure [U]want[/U] in really the right word. I wasn't missing it before it existed. But... It's kind of cool. I like toys. This doesn't seem unbalanced. It's different enough that it doesn't really seem to trample on anything existing. It seems to make the Monk a bit less "what the heck is that doing here?" So, sure. Throw it in. I'd rather have the Mystic than the Barbarian. 2) Does the Mystic represent a continuation of the idea of Psionics from previous editions? Eh... Not really. Sure, there are some nods, here and there, but it really doesn't match up particularly well. Psionics in earlier editions were strange and unusual. The Mystic is just pseudo-eastern mysticism. Again, cool, but not really bearing the torch. 3) Do I want Psionic-Magic Transparency (a.k.a. are psionics different)? If a Wizard can [I]dispel[/I] an effect created by divine power then I see no reason why he should not be able to do the same with an effect created by psionics. So, while I don't mind a different subsystem for using psionics (points, skill rolls, whatever), I think psionic-magic transparency is mandatory. 4) What would it take to represent Psionics in 5E? What are the actual characteristics of Psionics? This is really one of the two big questions, isn't it (the other being about the Mystic)? It can be broken down into sub-questions: a) Where do psionics come from? We've got a pretty good idea of what arcane magic is. It's manipulating cosmic forces through codified incantations and gestures. Wizards do this by learning the details of these and there's probably a nit to pick with Charisma-based arcanists. Divine magic, on the other hand, comes from some outside force (usually a deity, but could be a force, philosophy, or just tapping into faith). Pretty much all divine casters use Wisdom to represent how well they understand the will/nature of their benefactor. It really doesn't matter whether the divine agent is manipulating the same forces as an arcanist or producing raw power -- they're doing it as an aspect of their nature and it's innate to them. So.... Psionics.... To be meaningfully different, regardless of system, it can't be just arcane manipulation of cosmic forces. Nor can it be channeling the power of some other entity. It [U]could[/U] be a [U]different[/U] cosmic force, which could make sense, but raises the question about psionic-magic transparency, again. Or, it could be some sort of power that comes from the psion, themselves. This works pretty well with the whole "exposure to the Far Realm awakens you". It also works with "magical mutations" from Dark Sun or the way I've seen it used in many home brews. b) What "modules" should be used to add Psionics? There are two major ways psionics have been played offered over the editions: wild talents and classes. I think both need to be present, to really be psionics of the D&D tradition. I wouldn't carry over the "roll d% to see if you get psionics" from 1E any more than I still roll for stats. With the introduction of feats, I think the wild talent problem is solved and balanced, though. Use something that looks like the Magic Initiate feat (or even just actually use that feat, depending on class implementation). So, feats + classes. Maybe even sub-classes, depending on specific ideas. I think I prefer an Eldritch Knight sort of sub-class to Fighter over the stand-alone Psionic Warrior from 3.5E. YMMV. Also, that's a detail, at this point. c) What's been consistent about Psionics, over the years? I'm going to discount 4E, which totally scrambled basic game structures. In all other editions, psionics has had some sort of power point structure (I think, can't remember 2E, for sure) and has avoided the VSM components of other "caster" classes. Also, there wasn't any spell preparation; you just knew your powers. Plus, there was a subsystem for psychic combat. The details of some of those varied, but they were there. d) Is there anything in 5E that's similar? Well.... Actually, the Sorcerer is pretty close, if you look at the flavor text: The Sorcerer gets power from themselves, not from some outside entity and not from codified practice. The fact that the mechanics of the class still require them to use the VSM is something of an odd design artifact. Really, a Wild Sorcerer is someone who has so much power coursing through them that they can't hardly contain it. When they really work at it, they can focus that raw magic into something meaningful -- like a ball of fire. The fact that this looks like the [I]fireball[/I] used by Wizards is either incidental or is because some historic Wizard did a lot of work to duplicate what some Sorcerer did. From a rules perspective, there's no good reason not to just say, "use the rules for [I]fireball[/I]". From a flavor perspective, there really shouldn't be any mechanics forcing the Sorcerer to use VSM. If you hand-wave the VSM and use the spell points rules from the DMG, you end up with a Sorcerer who could pass for a Psion at least 80%. No, they don't get their own "spell" list. There's also no psychic combat. But, it's pretty close, otherwise. I don't think the separate spell list is a real issue. There's been a pretty consistent march towards having a standardized list since 1E became 2E. Plus, a lot of the "neo-Vancian" aspects of 5E magic is really just the normal casters looting some of the 3E Psion's goodies. Psychic combat is of dubious value (and always has been), but could be added in a variety of ways. 5) Do I want to see Psionics implemented in 5E? Yeah, I do. I've always used them and like them. I may not use them the same way as some, but I think that's part of the beauty of them -- they're a poorly defined subsystem that works well for "I have something different". 6) Do I want (a) dedicated Psionics class(es) added to 5E? Eh, not really. I think I'd rather just see Sorcerer fixed. Even if you don't want it to be the new Psion, it's still hard to swallow that they need the VSM restriction. Even without Psionics, I'd like to see the Sorcerer actually perform like someone who is a living mana battery. Once you get to that point, there's really not much mechanical difference between a 5E Sorcerer with a Mentalist subclass with thematic toys and a 3.5 Psion -- unless you really liked the ectoplasmic trappings. If you like power points, just use the DMG spell points on the (VSM-less) Sorcerer. Personally, I don't care about power points vs. slots. As far as psychic combat, either make it a feature of the Mentalist/Psion sub-class or do it through some new spells. The latter option seems to be where the Mystic has gone. Personally, I'm just fine ceding psychic combat to the Mystic and letting the Sorcerer take the mantle of "wild talent". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you want psionics in your D&D?
Top